Eucharist - or - Communion?

While I do not want to always contend with our Roman Catholic brethren; I do feel that it is good that everyone better understand many of the issues where we disagree. That is my purpose in this dialogue; not to argue with or to prove my Friend, Neal, wrong -- but, so that we all my have a clearer understanding of these Biblical teachings and the related teachings of the liturgical churches. Neal is Episcopalian, not Roman Catholic. Yet, on issues such as we discuss in this dialogue, he leans heavily toward the Roman Catholic side.

If you find this useful, please feel free to share it with your Friends, Relatives, Associates, and Neighbors -- all your FRANs. Let's keep sharing God's Word with the world -- until He returns.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hi to my Forum Friends,

In the discussion I began titled "Did Jesus Leave Us Two Ordinances: Baptism And Communion?" -- Beter questions Neal/Aude on the use of the phrase "Words of Institution" which Neal tells us are required to bring about Transubstantiation, i.e, the change of the Eucharist or Communion elements of bread and wine into the actual Body and Blood of Christ.

Celebrating the Lord's Supper, i.e., remembering the Last Supper, can be called both Eucharist or Communion; for Eucharist is normally defined as: a Christian sacrament commemorating the Last Supper by consecrating bread and wine. However, most Protestants prefer Communion for two reasons.

First, because when we take the elements of bread and fruit of the vine, juice -- we are remembering our Lord Jesus Christ and what He has done for us -- and, we are in communion, i.e., fellowship, with Him and with like minded Christian believers. We are celebrating His life, death, and resurrection which He did for us. And, we reflect upon our own Christian life and what we can do to be more mature Christ Followers.

The second reason Protestants resist using the word Eucharist is because we relate this to the belief taught in the Roman Catholic and other liturgical churches -- that the elements, upon the prayer of a priest -- becomes the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. To us, the mass and the Eucharist, are sacrificing Him over and over again. When, we know that He died once for all. We are to remember Him; not re-sacrifice Him.

Neal tells Beter, "That is because it is not a sacrament to you, no prayer to the Holy Spirit to come upon the elements and become the living Body and Blood of Christ. To us, it is not a memorial rite, rather a means of gaining grace and forgiveness of sins, we are assured that "He lives in us and we in Him." Not just figuratively, but literally and spiritually. A sacrament is not just an ordinance to us. It is the outward and visible sign of a inner and spiritual grace."

You say that through the priest pronouncing this prayer you call the "Words of Institution" -- the elements become the actual body and blood of Christ -- and then, when you consume Him, He lives within you.

The Bible tells us that He, the Holy Spirit, is within us the moment we become a Christian believer. Ephesians 1:13, "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the Gospel of your salvation — having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise."

At that time, the moment of salvation, Christ sends the Holy Spirit to indwell, reside in, all believers. If God, the Holy Spirit, is already in us -- how can we add more God, Jesus Christ? Either the glass is full or it is empty. If it is full -- you cannot add more. And, with Christian believers -- the glass of God within us is FULL.

Yet, we follow His command, His ordinance, which Jesus Christ left us to do, Communion -- in remembrance of Him. Luke 22:19, "And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

Then, Neal tells us, "The bishops long ago decided what was to be in the formulae -- and their assistants, the priests, alongside their assistants and lay assistants, have either licenses or, in the case of deacons (are) ordained to preach and marry and proclaim the Gospel, and priests are given a share of the Holy Spirit's power by laying on of hands by the Bishop who is a latter day apostle."

You say the Bishop is a latter day apostle; yet, I find no mention of latter day apostles in the Bible.

Ephesians 4:11-13, "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ."

Here we see the designation of apostles and prophets which were active in the days of Jesus Christ and in the generation which was of Jesus Christ. An apostle is defined, in Acts 1:21-22, when Peter and the other ten remaining apostles took it upon themselves to elect a twelfth apostle after Judas committed suicide, "Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us — one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." If a man did not actually walk with Jesus Christ and His apostles -- that man could not be an apostle. No man today can claim to have walked with Jesus and the apostles.

The last true apostle, John, died in Ephesus, about 100 AD. The last prophet, John the Baptist, died while Christ was still in His earthly ministry. This leaves only evangelists, pastors, and teachers. We have in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, the appointment of the overseer, in the King James called the bishop. But, if we are to view this passage and Titus 1:5-9 to mean bishop as you do in the liturgical churches -- then all pastors, i.e, priests should be called bishops. A more common usage of the the Greek word "episkope" is to translate it as elder or pastor. Strong's Concordance defines it as: the office of an elder, the overseer or presiding officers of a Christian church.

While many Southern Baptists do ordain deacons; this is not the practice of all Baptist churches; nor even of all Southern Baptist churches. In the Baptist General Conference, i.e., General Baptists, our local churches can have both elders and deacons. Elders are the spiritual leaders of the church. This would include the pastors who, being ordained, can preside at weddings. But, the elders are not ordained. They are chosen from the more mature men of the church and help the pastor or pastors in the spiritual leadership of the local church.

The deacons and deaconesses are the ones who keep the local church running on a daily basis -- caring for the facilities, the needs of church members, making sure that all is done to assure that the worship services go smoothly, etc. In Acts 6, where we read of the twelve apostles of the early church choosing seven mature men to be deacons, we will find the duties of the deacons and deaconesses defined -- to take care of the daily needs of the local church, the local body of believers -- while the apostles, i.e., the elders, devoted themselves to the spiritual needs of the church.

However, in smaller churches, or new church plants -- there may only be elders who will do both tasks. For several years, I was one of three elders in a Baptist General Conference church of less that 100 people; and we assumed the roles of both elder and deacon.

But, nowhere in Scripture do we find latter day apostles, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and popes described, defined, or designated.

Neal, you tell us, "They are under the bishop's rule and allowed to share their sacerdotal power in pronouncing of forgiveness of sins in the name of the Holy Trinity, and of calling down the Holy Spirit to make the bread and wine holy, the continuation of the Last Sacrifice of Our Lord. It is a sacrifice of praise and faith, but He becomes present and we do consume him, unworthy as we are. By that we are assured we are free of all sin we have confessed and for which we are truly sorry and do repent and resolve to seek the aid of the Holy Spirit to avoid further sin."

Have you really read what you have written? The priest can forgive sins? I looked for other sources of this statement and found this:

THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12406a.htm

The Christian law also has necessarily its priesthood to carry out the Divine service, the principal act of which is the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the figure and renewal of that of Calvary. This priesthood has two degrees: the first, total and complete, the second an incomplete participation of the first. The first belongs to the bishop. The bishop is truly a priest (sacerdos), and even a high-priest; he has chief control of the Divine worship (sacrorum antistes), is the president of liturgical meetings; he has the fullness of the priesthood, and administers all the sacraments.

The second degree belongs to the priest (presbyter), who is also a sacerdos, but of the second rank ("secundi sacerdotes" Innocent I ad Eugub.); by his priestly ordination he receives the power to offer sacrifice (i.e. to celebrate the Eucharist), to forgive sins, to bless, to preach, to sanctify, and in a word to fulfill the non-reserved liturgical duties or priestly functions. In the exercise of these functions, however, he is subject to the authority of the bishop to whom he has promised canonical obedience; in certain cases even he requires not only authorization, but real jurisdiction, particularly to forgive sins.

Neal, we have only one High Priest. "Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people" (Hebrews 2:17).

And, even the Pharisees knew that "only God can forgive sins." This is one of their accusations against Jesus Christ -- that He claimed to forgive sins (Mark 2:1-12). Yet, what they were missing was -- that He is God and can forgive sins. Neither a pastor or priest, nor even the pope, is God and can forgive sins. No man, no human, can forgive sins. Only God can forgive sins. And, we have only ONE Mediator between God and man -- the Man, Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5).

And, you say, "and of calling down the Holy Spirit to make the bread and wine holy, the continuation of the Last Sacrifice of Our Lord."

We are told over and over again, in Scripture that Jesus Christ died once for all. There is not place in Scripture that tells us to "continue the Last Sacrifice of Our Lord."

Romans 6:10, "For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God."

Hebrews 7:27, "Who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for alll when He offered up Himself."

Hebrews 9:12, "And not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption."

Hebrews 10:10, "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

1 Pete 3:18, "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit."

Yet, you tell us that you "continue the Last Sacrifice of Our Lord." Either the Bible is wrong -- or you are wrong. Which is it?

Finally, you tell us, "It is a reenactment of the first Holy Communion which was on Maundy Thursday, just before He was betrayed and given over to suffering and death."

In essence, you and I agree on this. Yet, I would call it the Last Supper; not the First Communion -- for He had not yet died on the cross. Maundy merely means "command" -- in other words, the command He left us during that Last Supper on the Thursday before He died on the cross on Friday -- that through Communion with Him and other saints, we are to remember Him until He returns.

Neal, what I have shared comes from the Bible -- which is the Sole Authority, the Written Word of God, for all Christian believers. It is our User's Manual to teach us and guide us in all aspects of our Christian life, to teach us that we are to be about the task of bringing the unsaved to Christ for salvation. We need no other authority; we need no other traditions; we need no other rituals. He has given us ALL we need to gain salvation and to help others gain salvation. All we have to do is to accept His "free gift" of salvation -- and be Christ Followers.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill Gray